[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 131 (Thursday, July 9, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37088-37089]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18160]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

46 CFR Part 514

[Docket No. 98-10]


Inquiry Into Automated Tariff Filing Systems as Proposed by the 
Pending Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998

AGENCY: Federal Maritime Commission.

ACTION: Notice of Inquiry.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The purposes of this Inquiry are to determine an approach that 
will produce automated tariff publication systems that best comport 
with the directives of S. 414, the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998, 
and its legislative history, and to determine whether ocean common 
carriers should be required to file service contracts electronically. 
The proposed legislation would alter, among other things, the manner by 
which ocean common carriers publish their tariffs under the Shipping 
Act of 1984, 46 U.S.C. app. Sec. 1701 et seq., by requiring them to 
publish their tariffs in private automated tariff systems. Comments are 
solicited on the possible requirements for such tariff filing systems 
and on the electronic filing of service contracts and publication of 
essential terms.

DATES: Comments due on or before August 10, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Send comments (original and 20 copies) to: Joseph C. 
Polking, Secretary, Federal Maritime Commission, 800 North Capitol 
Street, NW, Washington, DC 20573-0001, (202) 523-5725.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bryant L. VanBrakle, Director, Bureau 
of Tariffs, Certification and Licensing, Federal Maritime Commission, 
800 North Capitol Street, NW, Washington, DC 20573-0001, (202) 523-5796 
and Thomas Panebianco, General Counsel, Federal Maritime Commission, 
800 North Capitol Street, NW, Washington, DC 20573-0001, (202) 523-
5740.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 21, 1998, the Senate passed S. 414, 
a bill entitled the ``Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998'' (``Reform 
Act''). The bill was subsequently referred to the House of 
Representatives, where it is presently awaiting either referral to 
appropriate committees or a vote by the full House. If the latter 
occurs prior to adjournment in the fall, the Federal Maritime 
Commission (``FMC'' or ``Commission'') will have the task of proposing 
and adopting rules to implement the Reform Act in a very short time 
period, since the Reform Act generally takes effect on May 1, 1999, and 
the bill requires final implementing regulations to be promulgated by 
March 1, 1999.
    The Reform Act amends the Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. app. 
Sec. 1701 et seq.) (``1984 Act'') in several areas, altering the manner 
by which the United States regulates international ocean shipping. One 
of the most significant changes is in the treatment of common carrier 
tariffs, the publications which contain the rates and charges for their 
transportation services. Currently, common carriers and conferences 
must file their tariffs with the commission's Automated Tariff Filing 
and Information System (``ATFI''). Under the Reform Act, carriers no 
longer will have to file with the Commission, but will be required to 
publish their rates in private, automated tariff systems. These tariffs 
will have to be made available electronically to any person, without 
time, quantity, or other limitation, through appropriate access from 
remote locations, and a reasonable charge may be assessed for such 
access, except for Federal agencies. In addition, the Commission is 
charged with prescribing the requirements for the ``accessibility and 
accuracy'' of these automated tariff systems, unlike the ``form and 
manner'' requirements under the current law. The Commission also can 
prohibit the use of such systems, if they fail to meet the requirements 
it establishes.
    It is against this background that the Commission is initiating 
this inquiry to solicit comments from the ocean transportation industry 
and the general public on how best to establish requirements for 
carriers' automated tariff systems. Such comments should assist the 
Commission in formulating and proposing a rule in this area in the 
event that the House passes S. 414 and it is signed into law by the 
President.
    The primary function of the publication of tariffs is to provide 
the shipping public with reliable information on the price and service 
options to move particular commodities from point A to point B. This 
information would necessarily include all applicable assesorials, 
additional charges, and surcharges, so that the shipper can obtain a 
``bottom-line'' price for the service it seeks. Consistent with the 
Reform Act's common carriage principles, shippers should be able to use 
this information to compare competing carriers' offerings and to assess 
whether they are being

[[Page 37089]]

unreasonably discriminated against vis-a-vis their competitors. In 
addition, public tariff information enables carriers to monitor their 
competitors and adjust their pricing and service structures 
accordingly.
    A perhaps no less important function of tariff publication is to 
permit the Commission to monitor the rate activity of carriers and 
conferences. In light of the fact that the Reform Act would continue to 
grant antitrust immunity for collective ratemaking, the ability to 
monitor collectively-established rates remains particularly important. 
The Commission also needs to be able to monitor carrier rate activity 
to ensure that the prohibited acts in section 10 of the Reform Act are 
not violated. In this regard, the Commission will always need a 
historical record of rate activity, perhaps commensurate with the five 
year statute of limitations in the Reform Act. In addition, the ability 
to monitor the rate activity of controlled carriers is crucial to the 
Commission's enforcement of the controlled carrier provisions of the 
Reform Act.
    The problem facing the Commission and the industry is how to 
reconcile these basic purposes of tariff publication with the relative 
discretion Congress would grant carriers to develop their own automated 
tariff systems. The report of the Senate Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation, S. Rep. No. 61, 105th Cong., 1st Sess. 
(1997) (``Committee Report''), is instructive in this regard. The 
Committee noted that innovative private sector approaches, such as 
World Wide Web pages, should be encouraged, stating that common 
carriers should be free to develop their own means of tariff 
publication. Committee Report at 23. Although the Committee reiterated 
that there should be no government restraints on the design of a 
private tariff publication system, it also stated that such systems 
must assure the integrity of the common carrier's tariff and of the 
tariff system as a whole and provide the appropriate level of public 
access to tariff information. Id. The Committee also stated that tariff 
information should be ``simplified and standardized.'' Id. The 
Committee further noted that the Commission will retain its authority 
to suspend or prohibit the use of tariffs found to violate the 1984 Act 
or other U.S. shipping laws. Id. at 22-23.
    As a point of reference, because ATFI uses uniform transaction sets 
for tariff material,\1\ it presents tariff information uniformly, and 
substantive tariff provisions are located identically within each 
carrier's tariff. In addition, carriers are required to provide 
electronic links within each tariff so that shippers can calculate a 
bottom-line freight charge. Under ATFI, the Commission also validates, 
among other things, specific ports and points listed to ensure 
industry-wide uniformity and requires that equipment descriptions be 
standardized.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ ATFI's transaction sets prescribe specific requirements as 
to the data dictionary, field size, syntax, data elements, mandatory 
and optional fields, format, and segment definitions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The question thus becomes how to meld the various Congressional 
directives in the Reform Act and its legislative history to produce 
tariff publication requirements that fully comport with the letter and 
the spirit of the Reform Act. The Commission, therefore, is seeking 
public comment on how best to achieve this goal. Commenters should feel 
free to address any aspect of automated systems relevant to this 
inquiry. However, we have proposed some questions that may focus 
discussion in the proper direction:
    1. What are the best methods for standardizing tariff information?
    2. Should tariffs contain uniform rate/commodity/geographic scope 
searching mechanisms?
    3. Describe any available options for standardizing commodity 
descriptions.
    4. How can we ensure that the systems produce accurate bottom-line 
freight charges for shippers?
    5. Should carriers be required to use uniform transaction sets 
(such as ATFI transaction sets) for the transmission of information in 
automated tariff systems?
    6. How long should systems be required to maintain historical 
tariff information?
    7. Describe how tariff systems can automatically block the 
publication of unlawful rate actions (e.g., an increased cost to the 
shipper published to become effective less than 30 calendar days after 
publication; changes in a controlled carrier's tariff published to 
become effective less than 30 days after publication)?
    8. How can the systems give the Commission the ability to void 
tariff material that contravenes the statute or its regulations?
    9. How should tariff systems be structured to handle carrier 
requests for Commission approval of deviations from its rules, 
including increased costs to shippers to become effective less than 30 
days after publication?
    10. How can the Commission meet its responsibilities efficiently 
under sections 5, 6, 9 and 10 of the Act if faced with nonuniform 
tariff systems?
    11. Could tariff systems be designed so that the Commission could 
access certain functionalities that might not otherwise be available to 
the general public (e.g., to generate ad hoc and recurring reports, 
facilitate tariff review, and examines tariff's history)?
    12. Could tariff systems be designed to automatically inform the 
Commission when an amendment is made?
    13. How can tariff systems be designed to facilitate the 
Commission's suspension or prohibition of the use of tariffs or tariff 
material found to violate the 1984 Act or other U.S. shipping laws?
    14. What standards should the Commission apply to measure the 
accuracy and accessibility of a carrier's automated tariff publication 
system?
    15. How can tariffs be simplified?
    In a related matter, the Reform Act directs carriers to file their 
service contracts with the Commission on a confidential basis. The 
Reform Act does not specify that these filings be done electronically. 
Service contracts under the 1984 Act are currently filed in paper form. 
In FY 1997 the Commission received 10,500 new contracts and nearly 
29,000 amendments. This compares with 9,400 contracts and 19,500 
amendments in FY 1996. By all indications, the number of service 
contract filings will continue to increase significantly, particularly 
under a statutory scheme providing greater confidentiality in contract 
terms. Accordingly, the Commission also is seeking comments in this 
inquiry regarding the electronic filing of service contracts with the 
Commission. Electronically filed service contracts, unlike the publicly 
available essential terms, would be available only to the Commission 
and its staff. Commenters favoring electronic filing may suggest 
possible approaches for implementing such filing, including issues 
regarding digitized signatures and text versus data format. Commenters 
are also requested to address the issues as they relate to the 
publication of certain essential terms in tariff format in private 
automated systems.
    Now therefore, It is ordered that this Notice of Inquiry be 
published in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.
Ronald D. Murphy,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18160 Filed 7-8-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-M